|
|
Post by SolidLight on Jul 6, 2020 11:14:10 GMT
I use Scharnhorst. Though looking at the math alex seem almost identical. Maybe Scharnhorst is a little stronger since artillery isn’t going to kill stuff for morale. So inspiration might push him above. Barclay is going to boost Massena and Karl so that trio is stronger than Massena, Karl, Washington. Though Washington has better survivability which matters a lot for infantry. That said, that trio still sucks because no one has victory rush, good mobility or good enough durability. so the best combination with mahmud is scharn? even with the aura from alexander is it still not worth getting him and getting scharn? does that make scharn the 3 strongest arty after napolean and mahmud? also not worth going a 3rd inf gen? and not a 3-2-2-1? btw thanks for replying man i am getting dabrowski and also should i go 3-2-2-1 or nah? I'm not assuming that we use Scharnhorst together with Mahmud since that isn't useful. Either only one of them will be fielded or they'd be split off. This is because Artillery isn't efficient at killing the vast hordes of enemies you have to face in campaign and that 2 artillery generals so close to each other in conquest is overkill for the purpose of sieging, which is what you bring artillery for in conquest. If you do however use your artillery close to each other, then Alex is much better than Scharnhorst because Alex can buff Mahmud and Scharnhorst cannot. The same principle applies to infantry generals. However, infantry DO have a slightly better weapon type for the purpose of killing stuff, so you CAN have 3 infantry auras close to each other and then fight. That isn't as good as it sounds though since you have an even better option for the purpose of killing stuff, namely cavalry. A single competent cavalry general is probably on par with 1 super buffed infantry general. And they're tougher, and they're faster, and they can attack multiple times. So yeah, I don't think a 3rd infantry general is worth it for an 8 slot player, though it is viable to use them up until Crimean War, then they're hopeless. So for an 8 slot player I actually think one should go 4 cav - 2 art - 2 inf before you go into Crimean War. Admirals are unecessary until Crimean war. A second artillery and infantry general is situational but sometimes handy. During Crimean war I'd suggest trading the infantry generals for admirals. And for 3 starring Balaclava you should be getting only infantry and artillery since you have to use 0 cavalry generals when 3 starring that misson. |
|
johnwick
Staff Sergeant
I'm thinking I'm back
Posts: 9
|
Post by johnwick on Jul 6, 2020 11:25:35 GMT
so the best combination with mahmud is scharn? even with the aura from alexander is it still not worth getting him and getting scharn? does that make scharn the 3 strongest arty after napolean and mahmud? also not worth going a 3rd inf gen? and not a 3-2-2-1? btw thanks for replying man i am getting dabrowski and also should i go 3-2-2-1 or nah? I'm not assuming that we use Scharnhorst together with Mahmud since that isn't useful. Either only one of them will be fielded or they'd be split off. This is because Artillery isn't efficient at killing the vast hordes of enemies you have to face in campaign and that 2 artillery generals so close to each other in conquest is overkill for the purpose of sieging, which is what you bring artillery for in conquest. If you do however use your artillery close to each other, then Alex is much better than Scharnhorst because Alex can buff Mahmud and Scharnhorst cannot. The same principle applies to infantry generals. However, infantry DO have a slightly better weapon type for the purpose of killing stuff, so you CAN have 3 infantry auras close to each other and then fight. That isn't as good as it sounds though since you have an even better option for the purpose of killing stuff, namely cavalry. A single competent cavalry general is probably on par with 1 super buffed infantry general. And they're tougher, and they're faster, and they can attack multiple times. So yeah, I don't think a 3rd infantry general is worth it for an 8 slot player, though it is viable to use them up until Crimean War, then they're hopeless. So for an 8 slot player I actually think one should go 4 cav - 2 art - 2 inf before you go into Crimean War. Admirals are unecessary until Crimean war. A second artillery and infantry general is situational but sometimes handy. During Crimean war I'd suggest trading the infantry generals for admirals. And for 3 starring Balaclava you should be getting only infantry and artillery since you have to use 0 cavalry generals when 3 starring that misson. I have done crimean war 3 stars everything and im on the prussian and colombian stuff. do I go for 2-4-2? I like to get 1 of everything. maybe a 2-3-2-1? murat dabrow and maybe a lan(or is davout better)? |
|
|
|
Post by SolidLight on Jul 6, 2020 12:53:28 GMT
I'm not assuming that we use Scharnhorst together with Mahmud since that isn't useful. Either only one of them will be fielded or they'd be split off. This is because Artillery isn't efficient at killing the vast hordes of enemies you have to face in campaign and that 2 artillery generals so close to each other in conquest is overkill for the purpose of sieging, which is what you bring artillery for in conquest. If you do however use your artillery close to each other, then Alex is much better than Scharnhorst because Alex can buff Mahmud and Scharnhorst cannot. The same principle applies to infantry generals. However, infantry DO have a slightly better weapon type for the purpose of killing stuff, so you CAN have 3 infantry auras close to each other and then fight. That isn't as good as it sounds though since you have an even better option for the purpose of killing stuff, namely cavalry. A single competent cavalry general is probably on par with 1 super buffed infantry general. And they're tougher, and they're faster, and they can attack multiple times. So yeah, I don't think a 3rd infantry general is worth it for an 8 slot player, though it is viable to use them up until Crimean War, then they're hopeless. So for an 8 slot player I actually think one should go 4 cav - 2 art - 2 inf before you go into Crimean War. Admirals are unecessary until Crimean war. A second artillery and infantry general is situational but sometimes handy. During Crimean war I'd suggest trading the infantry generals for admirals. And for 3 starring Balaclava you should be getting only infantry and artillery since you have to use 0 cavalry generals when 3 starring that misson. I have done crimean war 3 stars everything and im on the prussian and colombian stuff. do I go for 2-4-2? I like to get 1 of everything. maybe a 2-3-2-1? murat dabrow and maybe a lan(or is davout better)? Wait what? Do you mean the British mission "Crimean War"? Since that's not what I mean. I mean the last bunch of the challenge missions, which is by far the hardest portion of the game. As I said, an admiral is not useful at the moment, not unless you're trying to speedrun conquests. Get Nelson if you still really want an admiral since he has the highest stats and is fairly usable, but not good, as a hybrid. Davout is inferior imo to Lan, Ney, and Paget. Lan and Ney are just better than him on average. Paget hits slightly harder than him but is slightly frailer. |
|
johnwick
Staff Sergeant
I'm thinking I'm back
Posts: 9
|
Post by johnwick on Jul 15, 2020 15:29:47 GMT
I have done crimean war 3 stars everything and im on the prussian and colombian stuff. do I go for 2-4-2? I like to get 1 of everything. maybe a 2-3-2-1? murat dabrow and maybe a lan(or is davout better)? Wait what? Do you mean the British mission "Crimean War"? Since that's not what I mean. I mean the last bunch of the challenge missions, which is by far the hardest portion of the game. As I said, an admiral is not useful at the moment, not unless you're trying to speedrun conquests. Get Nelson if you still really want an admiral since he has the highest stats and is fairly usable, but not good, as a hybrid. Davout is inferior imo to Lan, Ney, and Paget. Lan and Ney are just better than him on average. Paget hits slightly harder than him but is slightly frailer. Is the ultimate 4 cavs murat, dabrowski, lan, ney/davout. Is ney better than davout or is someone better? |
|
|
|
Post by SolidLight on Jul 15, 2020 19:11:34 GMT
Wait what? Do you mean the British mission "Crimean War"? Since that's not what I mean. I mean the last bunch of the challenge missions, which is by far the hardest portion of the game. As I said, an admiral is not useful at the moment, not unless you're trying to speedrun conquests. Get Nelson if you still really want an admiral since he has the highest stats and is fairly usable, but not good, as a hybrid. Davout is inferior imo to Lan, Ney, and Paget. Lan and Ney are just better than him on average. Paget hits slightly harder than him but is slightly frailer. Is the ultimate 4 cavs murat, dabrowski, lan, ney/davout. Is ney better than davout or is someone better? Ney is better than Davout on average. Paget actually deals slightly more damage than Davout too, but he has 4% less defense. |
|
johnwick
Staff Sergeant
I'm thinking I'm back
Posts: 9
|
Post by johnwick on Jul 16, 2020 6:38:08 GMT
Is the ultimate 4 cavs murat, dabrowski, lan, ney/davout. Is ney better than davout or is someone better? Ney is better than Davout on average. Paget actually deals slightly more damage than Davout too, but he has 4% less defense. Quick question which country 1812 is the easiest to get rank s in (doesnt matter the stars) Also should i use less generals in conquest? |
|
|
|
Post by SolidLight on Jul 16, 2020 6:51:37 GMT
Ney is better than Davout on average. Paget actually deals slightly more damage than Davout too, but he has 4% less defense. Quick question which country 1812 is the easiest to get rank s in (doesnt matter the stars) Also should i use less generals in conquest? Naples. Use as many generals as possible. The turns saved more than makes up for the points you lose from fielding a lot of generals. |
|
johnwick
Staff Sergeant
I'm thinking I'm back
Posts: 9
|
Post by johnwick on Jul 16, 2020 11:48:35 GMT
Quick question which country 1812 is the easiest to get rank s in (doesnt matter the stars) Also should i use less generals in conquest? Naples. Use as many generals as possible. The turns saved more than makes up for the points you lose from fielding a lot of generals. Is a navy general(only thinking nelson) good in crimean war chal? Or is 2-4-2 better. I heard he is quite useful or nah? |
|
|
|
Post by Nobunaga Oda on Jul 16, 2020 13:47:18 GMT
Naples. Use as many generals as possible. The turns saved more than makes up for the points you lose from fielding a lot of generals. Is a navy general(only thinking nelson) good in crimean war chal? Or is 2-4-2 better. I heard he is quite useful or nah? According to the most brilliant and hard-core members, they argued that a naval gen is not necessary if you are aiming for a 1* clear. You need to try it out first. Then, see if you need one. If you do, aim for the most powerful, Nelson. |
|
|
|
Post by SolidLight on Jul 16, 2020 14:41:27 GMT
Naples. Use as many generals as possible. The turns saved more than makes up for the points you lose from fielding a lot of generals. Is a navy general(only thinking nelson) good in crimean war chal? Or is 2-4-2 better. I heard he is quite useful or nah? It’s possible to beat Crimean war without admirals. Whether you can 3 star them is another story. But it’ll be really, really tough. If you really feel like you need an admiral for Crimean war, then switch out your infantry generals but keep them until then. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2020 16:36:11 GMT
Um general da marinha (apenas pensando Nelson) é bom nos desafios da guerra da Crimeia? Ou é 2-4-2 melhor. Ouvi dizer que ele é bastante útil ou não?
Is a navy general (just thinking Nelson) good at the challenges of the Crimean war?Or it is 2-4-2 better.I heard that it is quite useful or not?
Translated by Nobunaga Oda.
|
|
|
|
Post by Port on Mar 15, 2021 14:49:42 GMT
The worst path must be Beresford, Grouchy, and Voronstov. Has anyone completed the game with just that lineup.
|
|
|
|
Post by Josip Broz Tito on Jun 5, 2022 3:02:24 GMT
My plan
1. Massena (max inf aura and ambulance)
2. Murat (transfer Massena's ambulance, max cav commander)
3. Sophia (max her before purchasing)
4. Barclay
5. Mahmud II
6. Lan (max first)/Dabrowski
7. Victoria (max her before purchasing)
8. Lannes (50% off)
9. Sakurako (when the update drops) (max first)
Still can't say much. I'm still in early game.
|
|
|
|
Post by Erich von Manstein on Jun 5, 2022 21:28:22 GMT
My plan 1. Massena (max inf aura and ambulance) 2. Murat (transfer Massena's ambulance, max cav commander) 3. Sophia (max her before purchasing) 4. Barclay 5. Mahmud II 6. Lan (max first)/Dabrowski 7. Victoria (max her before purchasing) 8. Lannes (50% off) 9. Sakurako (when the update drops) (max first) Still can't say much. I'm still in early game. 2 suggestions: 1. Keep Sophia in the palace. She can be replaced by John on the battlefield, but there's no substitute for her as a princess. 2. Prioritize aura for land generals, so secure Karl before Lannes and choose Dabrowski between him and Lan. |
|
|
|
Post by Josip Broz Tito on Jun 6, 2022 1:03:20 GMT
My plan 1. Massena (max inf aura and ambulance) 2. Murat (transfer Massena's ambulance, max cav commander) 3. Sophia (max her before purchasing) 4. Barclay 5. Mahmud II 6. Lan (max first)/Dabrowski 7. Victoria (max her before purchasing) 8. Lannes (50% off) 9. Sakurako (when the update drops) (max first) Still can't say much. I'm still in early game. 2 suggestions: 1. Keep Sophia in the palace. She can be replaced by John on the battlefield, but there's no substitute for her as a princess. 2. Prioritize aura for land generals, so secure Karl before Lannes and choose Dabrowski between him and Lan. 1. Louise. 2. Karl seems a bit overpriced. |
|
